Old 2nd January 2004, 14:54   #1
ogg77
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 24
So, if Winamp5 is basically Winamp2...

.. why does MediaMonkey does not work with Winamp5 but with Winamp2?

In detail:
- If you configure MediaMonkex to use Winamp2 as external player, now Winamp5 opens. But while Winamp2 managed to enqueue new songs properly, now always the whole album is submitted and then, even worse, the wrong title is chosen.

Don't get me wrong, I don't ask for any debugging on third party software but I really wonder why you changed this part of the software which seemed to work OK already if you did no complete redesign anyway.



And one note about the troubles about communicating the versioning:

1. In my opinion it is no good style to make a major number step when the main parts are not changed. I know, other companies do that too, but...

2. In my opinion it's a lame joke to skip a version number. Again, other companies are no good example for you.

3. If you do such IMHO weird versioning, you should at least warn the user when he installs Winamp5 that the existing Winamp2 will be overwritten now. And maybe the hint, to use another directory in order to keep winamp2 would have helped here. I only got the warning that Winamp3 is removed but was (not very happily) surprised to have no Winamp2 any more.

And yes, for the reasons described above I still need the winamp2 and not WA5.

Again, I don't expect any single one of you to debug third party software but please consider the users of such software when substantionally changing parts of the interface/API and allow them to wait with an older version until their third party offers a new update which works with your update too.

Kind regards
Ronald
ogg77 is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 15:04   #2
MasterViVi
Senior Member
 
MasterViVi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 290
Re: So, if Winamp5 is basically Winamp2...

Quote:
Originally posted by ogg77
1. In my opinion it is no good style to make a major number step when the main parts are not changed. I know, other companies do that too, but...[/B]
Idd, I found this to be total crap, but then again, it's good product, I don't care of the version number. Version rc666 is installed and until something is added that I need, I'm isntalling that version. So if you want to stay with w2, do that. I just use w5 because of the Modern Skin. It does its job well
MasterViVi is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 15:10   #3
sanosuke
Major Dude
 
sanosuke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,891
Re: So, if Winamp5 is basically Winamp2...

Quote:
Originally posted by ogg77
1. In my opinion it is no good style to make a major number step when the main parts are not changed. I know, other companies do that too, but...
Its called 5 because 2+3=5
Quote:
Originally posted by ogg77
2. In my opinion it's a lame joke to skip a version number. Again, other companies are no good example for you.
see above
Quote:
Originally posted by ogg77
3. If you do such IMHO weird versioning, you should at least warn the user when he installs Winamp5 that the existing Winamp2 will be overwritten now. And maybe the hint, to use another directory in order to keep winamp2 would have helped here. I only got the warning that Winamp3 is removed but was (not very happily) surprised to have no Winamp2 any more.
you dont see that happening when you installed 2.9 over 2.8 so why should it happen from 2.9 to 5? (after all it is the same thing)
Quote:
Originally posted by ogg77
Again, I don't expect any single one of you to debug third party software but please consider the users of such software when substantionally changing parts of the interface/API and allow them to wait with an older version until their third party offers a new update which works with your update too.
i am not sure of any api changes that might conflict with such a program but usually for 3rd party plugins its best to contact the author of the plugin and ask for an update one.

Big-assed signature deleted by errr.. whats his name again??
sanosuke is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 15:15   #4
Lazesharp
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12
1 - If you can suggest a major version number higher than 2.9 that isn't 3 and is a real integer you've just turned the world of conventional mathematics on it's head.

2 - They had to skip 3, to aviod confusion with Winamp3 (which is an entirely different product), and while they're reason for skipping 4 may be a little silly to some people, it actually makes a lot of sense. Besides, if it was Winamp 4, you'd have a forum full of even more bith threads asking why it doesn't have feature x from Winamp3 (which, as previously mentioned, is an entirely different piece of software).

3 - Winamp 5 is the new version of winamp, as I have already said, it is merely an upgrade to Winamp 2.92. Are you suggesting that every single version and build of Winamp should be installed to a different location? Also, the installer plainly states the location it's going to install to, so you'll find that it's actually your stupidity that's to blame here.
Lazesharp is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 15:35   #5
ogg77
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 24
Re: Re: So, if Winamp5 is basically Winamp2...

Quote:
Originally posted by sanosuke
Its called 5 because 2+3=5
I understood that but the point is that this is still a lame and confusing joke (else all the fuzz about the versioning wouldn't take place, would it?)

Quote:
you dont see that happening when you installed 2.9 over 2.8 so why should it happen from 2.9 to 5? (after all it is the same thing)
That was my question

Quote:
i am not sure of any api changes that might conflict with such a program but usually for 3rd party plugins its best to contact the author of the plugin and ask for an update one.
And I anticipated this reply that's why I wrote the bottom line of my posting (sigh).
ogg77 is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 15:47   #6
ogg77
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally posted by Lazesharp
1 - If you can suggest a major version number higher than 2.9 that isn't 3 and is a real integer you've just turned the world of conventional mathematics on it's head.
Ever heard of a number 10?

If not, see Version 2.10 Examples as found bei Google
for examples or try to figure out what a major and a minor number in a version means before flaming 'round and shooting your own foot.


Quote:
3 - Winamp 5 is the new version of winamp, as I have already said, it is merely an upgrade to Winamp 2.92.
Are you suggesting that every single version and build of Winamp should be installed to a different location?
I only suggest:

- that if you do an minor upgrade, as from Winamp2.8 to Winamp2.9 for example, you name it like this but make sure that you really only do minor bug fixes.

- If you decide to do major update and change the API then you better warn the people that the older version will be overwritten

You only hace to decide once, what you are actually doing. But claiming a version jump from 2.x to 5.x a minor upgrade (as here) and still do major changes on the API (as described) is a confusing and bad idea.

Quote:
Also, the installer plainly states the location it's going to install to, so you'll find that it's actually your stupidity that's to blame here.
You think it is obvious that installing a Program 5.x into a directory where a version 2.x resides is a clear indication for removing version 2? I don't.

And yes, if the winamp people try to make the same lame jokes with version numbers as microsoft did with Word2.0 to Word 6.0 they should at least lern from M$ how to deal with parallel installations and when and how to warn users about that.
ogg77 is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 16:21   #7
sanosuke
Major Dude
 
sanosuke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Singapore
Posts: 1,891
Quote:
Originally posted by ogg77
Ever heard of a number 10?

If not, see Version 2.10 Examples as found bei Google
for examples or try to figure out what a major and a minor number in a version means before flaming 'round and shooting your own foot.
2.10 is the same as 2.1 which already exist, and would cause more confusion than it already would.

Big-assed signature deleted by errr.. whats his name again??
sanosuke is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 16:31   #8
ogg77
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally posted by sanosuke
2.10 is the same as 2.1
What? Certainly not!

Have some of you never heard of numbers bigger than 9?

Or did you not figure out that the point between 2 and 9 is not the decimal point but just the marker between major and minor number?

More examples of correct versioning

HTH
ogg77 is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 17:59   #9
Lazesharp
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12
The last release of 2.x was 2.92, the last internal release was 2.95

And I understand the point of major/minor versioning completely, which is why it should defiantely not be 2.9x (ie. 2.99), because the additions to Winamp are enough to justify a new major version number.

Also, it didn't delete 2.x, it overwrote it, your old config however should have been kept.

Also, the "API" hasn't changed as much as you are claiming, infact, the plug-in developers are probably more to blame.
Lazesharp is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 18:06   #10
Ice
Moderator Alumni
Americas Favorite Smut Peddler
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Sun Prarie, WI
Posts: 3,303
Quote:
Originally posted by ogg77
What? Certainly not!

Have some of you never heard of numbers bigger than 9?

Or did you not figure out that the point between 2 and 9 is not the decimal point but just the marker between major and minor number?

More examples of correct versioning

HTH
I think my 6th grade Math teacher would freak if you said 2.10 and 2.1 aren't the same. Just like when my PreCalc teacher freaked out when her kid learned that division by 0 is always 0.

I'd like to meet a mad man who makes it all seem sane
To work out all these troubles and what there is to gain
Ice is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 18:50   #11
spleef420
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Lost Wages
Posts: 166
Send a message via AIM to spleef420 Send a message via Yahoo to spleef420
this is nothing more than anal retentive hair-splitting. "oh no, what happened to 4? why does it want to overwrite 2? why is it deleting 3?"

does any of theis crap really matter? nobody cares how or why it does what it does as long as it works.

we have the "Winamp Wishlist", how's about a sticky "winamp bitchlist"
spleef420 is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 19:45   #12
MasterViVi
Senior Member
 
MasterViVi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 290
d00d; 2.10 = 2.1.

God, go get yourself a cookie and go to school.
MasterViVi is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 20:04   #13
ogg77
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally posted by Ice
I think my 6th grade Math teacher would freak if you said 2.10 and 2.1 aren't the same. Just like when my PreCalc teacher freaked out when her kid learned that division by 0 is always 0.
Because he is talking about real numbers and not versions like major.minor.patch-level.

You understood nothing, so why are you talking?

If you don't believe, try to divide 2.10.1 and 3 with your calculator. Maybe you will find out the difference between the number 2.9 and the version "2.9".
ogg77 is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 20:07   #14
ogg77
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally posted by Lazesharp
[B]The last release of 2.x was 2.92, the last internal release was 2.95

And I understand the point of major/minor versioning completely, which is why it should defiantely not be 2.9x (ie. 2.99), because the additions to Winamp are enough to justify a new major version number.
OK, then it should not remove Winamp2 without asking.

Quote:
Also, the "API" hasn't changed as much as you are claiming, infact, the plug-in developers are probably more to blame.
which brings us away of this mini-barbeque back to original question: What has changed in the API that leeds to this behaviour?
ogg77 is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 20:11   #15
ogg77
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally posted by MasterViVi
d00d; 2.10 = 2.1.

God, go get yourself a cookie and go to school.
Go and learn the difference between real numbers and version numbers and then come back to moms computer, OK?
ogg77 is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 20:17   #16
ogg77
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 24
Re: So, if Winamp5 is basically Winamp2...

Quote:
Originally posted by ogg77
.. why does MediaMonkey does not work with Winamp5 but with Winamp2?
So, while some people still try to figure out the difference between the numbers "2" and "9" and the number "2.9" somebody may has an answer besides this ridiculus flaming on the original question?

Or put into other words: What in the API or whatsoever has changed so much between 2.9 and 5.01, which makes third party software fail to work?
ogg77 is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 20:19   #17
spleef420
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Lost Wages
Posts: 166
Send a message via AIM to spleef420 Send a message via Yahoo to spleef420
Winamp 5 does not remove Winamp 2, it overwrites it. it asks if you want to remove Winamp3, if you want to keep 3 (not sure why) you click "no".

Winamp 5.01 is an UPGRADE to Winamp 2.9x

and it really isn't that damned difficult to tell the difference on the site as to which player is which...you have pro..14.95, and full...free. you pay to d/l pro, not full. and it also gives you the option to d/l full or lite.

it was stated some time ago that winamp 5 will not work with every plugin for 2.9x for whatever reason.

the plugin you are using does the EXACT same thing (from what i see on the site) as the media library in Winamp 5.01 Full/Pro. thereby making your plugin useless.
spleef420 is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 21:41   #18
ogg77
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally posted by spleef420
Winamp 5 does not remove Winamp 2, it overwrites it.
let's stop nitpicking here else we discuss remove+replace=overwrite.

Quote:
Winamp 5.01 is an UPGRADE to Winamp 2.9x
understood long ago, but the point is:

Quote:
it was stated some time ago that winamp 5 will not work with every plugin for 2.9x for whatever reason.
and therefore users should be informed about this fact before, so they can decide wether to upgrade or not. That's the point in this discussion.

Thanks for getting back to that point.

Quote:
the plugin you are using does the EXACT same thing (from what i see on the site) as the media library in Winamp 5.01 Full/Pro. thereby making your plugin useless.
No, I don't think so unless I find a "Multi-File-Tagging-Option" which is as confortable as in MM or a "Copy Selected files to folder" option in Winamp. And yes, its much faster than the Winamp5 ML.

Last edited by ogg77; 2nd January 2004 at 22:03.
ogg77 is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 22:20   #19
Nunzio390
Nugatory Aluminator
Look it up

 
Nunzio390's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Tharsis Ridge (Martian lowlands)
Posts: 8,588
Send a message via AIM to Nunzio390 Send a message via Yahoo to Nunzio390
@ ogg77...

If Winamp 5 is not to your liking for any reason, and since you like and are more comfortable with the MediaMonkey interface and the features it has in addition to / instead of the Winamp 5 ML features, and if it is much faster than the Winamp 5 ML, then do 1 of 2 things...

1. Contact the author of MediaMonkey and see if he/she is willing to make changes to their product to allow it to seamlessly work with Winamp 5. It is not the responsibility of Nullsoft to change their product to accommodate MediaMonkey.

2. Don't worry about it and instead join the misinformed people who posted in this thread at the MediaMonkey forums, and simply do not use the Winamp 5 Player but instead use the MediaMonkey Player, along with the rest of what the MediaMonkey music manager can provide you.
Quote:
Originally posted by ogger (Guest) in that Winamp 5 "misinformed persons" thread at the MediaMonkey forums...

To make it short: DO NOT INSTALL WINAMP5!
Choose from 1 or 2 above. Either way, you will be happy, and the pointless and ranting discussion in this thread can now finally come to a close.

*WHACKED*

Don't email or PM me concerning Winamp. Instead, either start a NEW TOPIC or post a REPLY in the appropriate thread in these forums. This will also benefit others who may have a similar question or problem. But before posting, please first Search the forums and read all FAQs and all Sticky threads.

ORB Remote Broadcast

[ Automated Jukebox | Nunzio's Home | Wacky Videos | Solve the Prunella Puzzle! ]
[ LINE RIDER! | My Resume | Virtual Chess | Composite Sketch | My Niece's Band ]
[ Plugins by Joonas | DrO's Winamp Plugins and Extras | K-Jöfol ]
Nunzio390 is offline  
Old 2nd January 2004, 22:26   #20
Ice
Moderator Alumni
Americas Favorite Smut Peddler
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Sun Prarie, WI
Posts: 3,303
Quote:
Originally posted by ogg77
You understood nothing, so why are you talking?
I think you need to calm down, and not take it as a personal attack.

I'd like to meet a mad man who makes it all seem sane
To work out all these troubles and what there is to gain
Ice is offline  
Closed Thread
Go Back   Winamp & Shoutcast Forums > Winamp > Winamp Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump